Photo

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Weird homes

Home is where the heart is, no matter what unusual form that home may take.  Slideshow 

Photo

The drone wars

The frontlines of America's covert drone program.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

Tax, spending divide hampers deficit cut push

President Barack Obama leaves the lecturn following remarks speaks about federal worker wage freezes in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building near the White House in Washington, November 29, 2010. REUTERS/Jason Reed

President Barack Obama leaves the lecturn following remarks speaks about federal worker wage freezes in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building near the White House in Washington, November 29, 2010.

Credit: Reuters/Jason Reed

WASHINGTON | Mon Nov 29, 2010 2:56pm EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two more proposals to cut the budget deficit emerged on Monday, underscoring a deep divide on taxes and spending that is likely to blunt the impact of a plan due in two days from a presidential panel.

The deficit and the national debt have soared in recent years.

The White House sharpened its focus on the issue on Monday, saying President Barack Obama will propose a two-year freeze on the pay of civilian federal workers.

The freeze would be more of a gesture than a substantive change, however, saving $2 billion from the current year's estimated $3.8 trillion budget.

Annual budget deficits in recent years have approached 10 percent of GDP, the highest levels seen since World War II, adding steadily to the record $13.6 trillion U.S. debt.

Assigned to come up with a comprehensive deficit strategy, a commission was set up earlier this year by Obama. It will meet on Wednesday to release and discuss a final report.

Commission members talked by telephone about their views over the Thanksgiving holiday. They had been expected to meet on Tuesday, but the commission said on Monday only one-on-one meetings between the co-chairman and members will occur then.

Little progress was seen for now on bridging a split between Democratic commission members who want to raise taxes and protect social program spending, versus Republicans opposed to tax increases and supportive of sharper spending cuts.

The Medicare and Medicaid health programs -- major drivers of long-term deficits -- are points of contention, as are defense spending, Social Security pensions, and politically sensitive tax breaks such as the mortgage interest deduction.

The chairmen of the Obama commission -- former Republican Senator Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, who was chief of staff for President Bill Clinton -- on November 10 unveiled their own set of recommendations. These, with revisions still being negotiated, were expected to form the basis of a final report to be voted on by the commission on Wednesday.

Most experts on the budget deficit agree that both tax increases and spending cuts are needed in any serious strategy to tackle the deficit and the fast-mounting national debt. But agreement on that has eluded the commission so far.

LIBERAL GROUPS UNVEIL REPORTS

A separate report issued on Monday by Our Fiscal Security, a coalition of liberal groups, called for restraining healthcare cost growth, cutting defense spending, and raising the cap on earnings subject to Social Security taxation.

It also recommended taxing capital gains and dividends as ordinary income, instead of at the present lower rate of 15 percent; capping itemized deductions; changing the charitable giving deduction to a credit, and limiting the deductibility of corporate debt interest payments for financial firms.

Our Fiscal Security includes the following groups: the Economic Policy Institute, The Century Foundation and Demos.

They additionally urged a financial speculation tax; a tax on roughly 60 major financial institutions with assets above $50 billion that benefited from 2008's Wall Street bailouts; a tax surcharge on millionaires, and a higher gasoline tax.

Another liberal group -- the Citizens' Commission on Jobs, Deficits and America's Economic Future -- put forward some similar proposals to "accelerate the economic recovery while achieving a stable and sustainable level of debt by 2015."

It said any plan to cut the deficit should be deferred until unemployment, running at 9.6 percent, drops to 5.5 percent. Otherwise, spending cuts and tax hikes could undermine the nation's fragile economic recovery, it said.

The group called for more federal aid to states, new steps to spur bank lending and expiration at year-end of tax cuts for the wealthy put in place by former President George W. Bush.

"We must remove Social Security from 'deficit cutting' exercises, increase its revenues, provide modest benefit increases, and assure the public that its $2.6 trillion trust fund assets will not be used for other purposes," it added.

(Reporting by Kevin Drawbaugh; Editing by Jan Paschal)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (3)
ginchinchili wrote:
The tax vote will serve as a litmus test revealing who is really serious about cutting the deficit and who isn’t. Any politician who votes to extend the tax cuts for the rich are clearly not serious about cutting the deficit and should be voted out of office. Tea Partiers take notice.

We will not be able to tackle the deficit without some increase in taxes and the wealthy are the only ones left who can afford it. After all, last quarter we saw the highest corporate profits on record, and yet Republicans when workers to keep taking it on the chin while protecting the wealth of America’s richest. It’s time to unite and a better deal in America’s economy. And while we’re at it the government should implement price freezes on prescription drugs and all healthcare-related services.

Nov 29, 2010 6:35pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Muerte wrote:
I only wish that all the liberal socialists had their total way, with taxing ALL the rich, and giving to all the poor. I wish this solely for the reason that maybe what these liberals didn’t learn in school, they would learn at the grocery store. If you take away from the rich, they will take away much, much more from you. Tax them more, penalize them more, and there will be no jobs, no business, and no income for the rest of us. Think this is melodramatic? I lost my job 2-years ago because the mega-company I worked for waited until the 2008 elections to see who would win, and once Barry was elected, they terminated hundreds of us. Likewise, in 2-years, when Barry is out and a conservative is in, don’t pat Barry on the back for his past influence, pat him on the back for being the next Jimmy-Carter-loser destined to be a one-term president. When it looks like a conservative will come back in office, the economy will take off again.

Nov 29, 2010 6:39pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ginchinchili wrote:
Muerte: What in my post do you disagree with and why? You make free use of pejorative terms and hyperbole, but don’t offer anything specific. Despite the fact that we’ve always had to raise taxes in order to SUCCESSFULLY lower our deficit; despite the fact that the rich are paying the second lowest tax rate that they’ve had to pay since the start of income taxes (second to only a period under Ronald Reagan during a time in which the deficit skyrocketed); despite the fact that during the mid 20th Century in America when our economy was historically stronger than at any other time the richest Americans were paying a 91% tax rate; despite the fact that corporate profits are at historical highs; despite the fact that the wealthiest Americans are the only economic group whose income has continued to grow over the last 30 years since Ronald Reagan slashed tax rates for America’s richest; despite all of that, the Republicans are still arguing that we should give the wealthiest Americans their tax cuts. This simply defies rational logic. To put it simply, we can’t afford it.

We’re not talking about returning to the tax rates during the time Eisenhower was President and people making over $300,000 a year were paying 91%. Not renewing the Bush tax cuts for the rich would only up the highest tax bracket from 35% to 39.6. If that’s socialism then the greatest country in the world has been a wonderful role model for socialism because during better times taxes were much, much higher for the rich and the majority of the country was much happier and economically comfortable. The economy was humming along like a finely tuned machine. People could also afford their healthcare without bankrupting them.

Raising personal income tax rates on the wealthiest Americans will have a negligible effect on job creation. The tax cuts have been in place for nearly 9 years and they aren’t creating jobs in America. It’s silly to suggest that all of a sudden after 9 years they’ll start creating jobs. That makes no sense.

You have no realistic understanding of how the economy works in job creation if you honestly believe that companies decide whether or not to hire based on if there’s a Democrat or Republican in the White House. That’s nonsense. The economy was very strong under Clinton (who also, I might add, raised taxes on the rich and succeeded in, not only balancing the budget, but produced a budget surplus). Did you not read that last quarter American companies recorded their highest profits since we started keeping track? If we had a Republican president you’d be waving that around saying that it was because we have a Republican in the White House. But, alas, it happened with a Democrat in the White House so you ignore the fact all together.

I hate to be the one to break this to you, but your losing your job had nothing to do with who won the presidency, so get that nonsense out of your head. It probably had more to do with your job being moved to China or India. That’s what corporate America is doing to make their record-breaking profits. Wake up and start sticking up for yourself, but do it with accurate information and not the propaganda that you’re being fed from Rush Limbaugh and FOX News.

Nov 29, 2010 9:24pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.